Safeguards in CDD Operations. CDD Core Training Course May, 2012

Transcription

1 Safeguards in CDD Operations CDD Core Training Course May, 2012

2 Outline Overview of Safeguards Policies Safeguard Approach for CDD Environmental Safeguards Acquiring Land and Involuntary Resettlement Application of OP 4.10 on Indigenous Peoples Framework Approach Constraints and Challenges Resources

3 10 Safeguards Policies OP/BP 4.01 Environmental Assessment: The policy provides the framework for the screening of projects, mitigation of potential impacts, disclosure and consultation, and capacity building. OP/BP 4.04 Natural Habitats: The policy is concerned with avoiding, minimizing and mitigating damage to natural habitats. It forbids the funding of activities in critical natural habitats. OP/BP 4.09 Pest Management: The policy promotes biological and environmental pest management where possible, and limits the selection and use of chemical pesticides. OP/BP 4.36 Forests: The policy promotes the sustainable management of forests, while protecting the rights and welfare of people dependent on forests. It limits financing of commercial harvesting and prohibits financing of conversion of critical forest habitats to plantations.

4 10 Safeguards Policies OP/BP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement: The policy applies when a project involves involuntary taking of land and involuntary restriction of access to legally designated parks and protected area. OP/BP 4.10 Indigenous Peoples: The policy aims to ensure that the development process fosters full respects the dignity, human rights and cultural uniqueness of such people, through free, prior and informed consultation. OP/BP 4.11 Physical Cultural Resources (PHRs): The policy seeks to avoid harm to significant, non-replicable cultural property, and provides guidance in the case of PHRs affected.

5 10 Safeguards Policies OP/BP 4.37 Safety of Dams: The policy provides detailed procedures for reviewing the design, construction and operation of new dams, as well as the simpler procedures for small and existing dams on which a Bank financed project is directly dependent. OP/BP 7.50 Projects on International Waterways: The policy applies to any project which involves the use or potential pollution of an international waterway, such as a trans-boundary river, and may require notification of project details to other riparians. OP/BP 7.60 Projects in Disputed Areas: The policy sets out conditions under which a project in an area claimed by another country may go ahead.

6 Framework Approach for CDD WHY Projects that Ex-ante do not define exact nature of subprojects/activities to be implemented WHAT Provide Approach that Defines Principles/Rules/Responsibilities for Assessing and Incorporating Safeguards into Subprojects Frameworks ESMF, EMF, ESSAF, IPPF, RPF, Process Framework 6

7 Framework Approach Key Principles Ensure environmental and social sustainability of sub-projects Clear screening system for sub-project proposals for their environmental and social impacts Design simple measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate any identified potential impacts proportional to sub-projects (e.g. a negative list to exclude proposals with excessive impacts) Clear procedures and responsibilities for each planning step design, screening, appraisal/approval, implementation and monitoring (incorporated into OM) Sound process for consultation, disclosure and grievances Standard audits of safeguards in performance reviews Clear process for the Bank s review of sub-project proposals (can be transferred to implementing agency if and when an efficient system and capacity is in place)

8 Framework Approach Key Preparation Work Review of national legal framework and identify gaps with WB Policies (e.g. often national ENV regs do not apply to smaller rural infrastructure subprojects) Consultation with relevant stakeholders, e.g. potential beneficiaries and implementing agencies, to understand sustainability, environmental and social issues Assess application of Framework for repeater projects Assess the capacity, limitations and multiple work loads of local district and village level staff Assess cost implications and allocate resources to implement framework and sub-project safeguard measures Assess and design opportunities for improving safeguard performance at local level and for regional authorities

9 CDD Typology Micro Small-Scale Medium Larger Scale 9

10 Common Environmental Impacts DEFICIENT DRAINAGE TO MANAGE EXCESS WATER MICRO-EROSION DUE TO STORM RUNOFF

11 Common Environmental Impacts SEPTIC TANK DISCHARGING TO SURFACE TIMBER HARVESTING FOR BOARDWALK, BRIDGE, BUILDING, AND BOAT DOCK PROJECTS

12 Common Environmental Impacts GROUND CONTAMINATION FROM FUEL/OIL USED FOR COMBUSTION ENGINES STEEP ROAD WITHOUT DRAINAGE Erosion or siltation of stream

13 Environmental Management Framework Screening Process Identification and assessment of impacts Measures to address impacts technical guidelines, checklists and matrices BASED on actual subproject types Good engineering design / DOs and DON Ts Simple Environmental Forms/Checklist Examples of different type of projects, anticipated adverse environmental impacts, and proposed mitigation options Picture books of good and bad environmental management practices, and good and bad infrastructure (road and bridges, water supply and sanitation, etc) Support to help technical facilitators and local communities

14 Picture Book of the DOs & DONTs Environmental Management (KDP)

15 Acquiring Land and Resettlement Approaches of acquiring land Application of OP 4.12 Resettlement Policy Framework Guidelines for land donation KDP KALAHI Key Implementation aspects

16 Approaches of Acquiring Land Voluntary land donation: means communities or individuals may agree to voluntarily provide land for sub-projects for desired community benefits. The operative principles in voluntary land donation are informed consent and power of choice. Informed consent: the people involved are fully knowledgeable about the project and its implications and consequences and freely agree to participate in the project Power of choice: the people involved have option to agree or disagree, without adverse consequences imposed formally or informally by others Acquiring land with agreed conditions: means individuals may agree to transfer the land ownership or using right to sub-projects with certain conditions, such as compensation in kind or cash. Land acquisition: means acquiring of land for some public purpose by government, as authorized by the law, from the individual landowner(s) after paying a government fixed compensation in lieu of losses incurred by land owner(s) due to surrendering of his/their land to the concerned government agency.

17 Application of OP 4.12 OP 4.12 does not apply to voluntary land donation (VLD) However, OP 4.12 applies to CDD operations as other approaches of acquiring land cannot be excluded Clear guidelines on VLD need to be included either in the operation manual or resettlement policy framework Resettlement Policy Framework needs to be prepared by project appraisal

18 Resettlement Policy Framework Principles and objectives governing resettlement preparation and implementation Clear procedures for documenting resettlement issues, including preparing and approving resettlement plans when needed Eligibility criteria for categories of displaced persons Review of the legal framework, gap analysis and measures to bridge gaps Methods for valuing affected assets Organizational procedure for delivery of entitlements, including responsibilities of each party (e.g. FI, the Government) Grievance redress mechanism Funding arrangements Consultation mechanisms Monitoring arrangements

19 Guidelines for Land Donation The infrastructure must not be site specific The impacts must be minor (no physical relocation, less than 10% of land holding) Land required must be identified by community through participatory approach No squatters, encroachers or other claims to the land donated Verification must be obtained from each person donating land Mitigation measures devised at community level need to be in place for potential loss of income

20 Voluntary Land Donation in KDP the land is identified by the beneficiary communities and confirmed by technical staff to be suitable for the sub-project and free from any environmental or health risks; the impacts on the land owners are marginal and do not result in displacement of households or cause loss of household s incomes and livelihood; the households making voluntary donations are direct beneficiary of the sub-project; land thus donated is free from any dispute on ownership or any other encumbrances; consultations with the affected households is conducted in a free and transparent manner; land transactions are supported by transfer of titles; and documentation of consultation meetings, grievances and actions taken to address such grievances are properly documented.

21 Format of land donation statement (KDP) Land Owner Data (name, address, occupation) Duration of donation Title, status, address, and condition of land Site Map Utilization of Land Signature of Land Owner & Head of Village, witnesses, and also acknowledgement of Board of Trustee

22 Voluntary Land Donation in KALAHI An assessment that the affected person does not suffer a substantial loss affecting his/her economic viability as a result of the donation; Certification from the LGUs and the proponents, that the land is free of claims or encroachments from any third party; Deed of Donation to the Community Association or the LGU concerned, as witnessed by the LGU and municipal government officials, notarized by a registered Lawyer, with copies of donation papers furnished the Office of the Municipal Assessor and the Provincial Register of Deeds; Declaration of Ownership with Waiver of Claims for Affected Assets; Joint Affidavit document of Two Adjoining Landowners or Officials (for unregistered lands); Waiver of Rights/Quit Claim (for plants, trees, houses, structures claimed by tenants, informal settlers) Waiver of Rights/Quit Claim (with Sharing of Claim)

23 Key Implementation Issues Proper guidelines need to be included in the project manuals Local communities should be well informed about the principles, approaches, and documentation requirements of land donation and acquisition process through process of social mobilization, consultations and participation in decision making All people involved should have easy access to information and complaint mechanisms Information of land donation and acquisition needs to be adequately documented, recorded and disclosed within the community Adequate facilitation, capacity building and support needs to be provided Supervision and monitoring by the Bank and Government are needed

24 Why a Apply OP 4.10 in CDD Projects? 1) Communities are not homogonous 2) Indigenous Peoples are distinct, vulnerable, social and cultural groups often the poorest and marginalized Indigenous Peoples may be excluded from sub-projects Indigenous Peoples may not receive culturally appropriate benefits Indigenous Peoples may not participate in decision making processes The land and natural resource use areas of Indigenous Peoples may not be recognized in sub-project planning

25 CASE: Philippines KALAHI Project monitoring found that non-participating community members were mostly Indigenous Peoples - due to: their isolation in the village; lack of confidence/trust in socializing with other community members; internal conflicts; lack of appreciation of participatory processes; and limited menu This led to design changes; e.g.: innovative design for culturally-appropriate sub-projects and specific targeting (JSDF Social Inclusion Project) e.g.: literacy/development training, alternative learning activities, orientation on the Philippines Indigenous Peoples Rights Act, reviving customary laws and practices, capacity building in organizational development/indigenous leadership, inter-personal skills enhancement, upgrading of community halls, and conflict mediation/resolution; improved participatory process; capacity building of IP communities

26 Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework Types of subprojects and their potential impacts and benefits Legal framework Screening for Indigenous Peoples affected by sub-projects Social assessment process for subprojects Framework for free, prior and informed consultations leading to broad community support to subprojects Procedures for documenting issues pertaining to Indigenous Peoples, including an IPP when needed Institutional arrangements (roles and responsibilities, capacity building, grievances) Monitoring and reporting requirements for subprojects (e.g. social audits, special studies) Grievance redress mechanism Budget and sources of funding

27 IPPF / Design for CDD Projects Overall targeting criteria to include Indigenous Peoples; An inclusive participatory planning and decision-making process to provide culturally appropriate benefits for different communities and sub-groups within a community; Baseline data on the ethnic and social composition of the project area as well as of individual beneficiary communities; Monitoring, usually including independent evaluations, to confirm that Indigenous Peoples are included in decision-making and benefit equally compared with other groups; Training of community-level facilitators in participatory approaches and Indigenous Peoples issues to achieve social inclusion; Appropriate menu for eligible subprojects, adapted to the needs and priorities of Indigenous Peoples, and developed through consultations with them Special arrangements, e.g. for procurement, IPP

28 CASE: Cameroon CD Program Small group of indigenous peoples affected and an Indigenous Peoples Plan (IPP) was prepared, organized around five areas: Equal legal opportunities; e.g. for citizenship (provide ID cards); IP settlements, including community forest and gathering areas Equal technical opportunities; e.g. assist the IPs to prepare community action plans; and to participate in local decision making Equal financial opportunities; e.g. subsidized lending rates; special programs for IPs to benefit from jobs (e.g. project staff) Equal organizational opportunities; e.g. capacity building of IP communities and implementing agencies to work with IPs; sensitization of all stakeholders to the circumstances of IPs; representation on project committees Equal cultural opportunities; e.g. sensitize IPs to risks from development; capacity building to preserve traditional knowledge; enhance cooperation between IPs and other ethnic groups

29 Frameworks Constraints and Challenges IEG Safeguard Review: Found that Frameworks are less well supervised than projects with specific risk assessment and management plans Frameworks lead to complexity in documentation, disclosure, consultation and monitoring/supervision Limited capacity of implementing agency Lack of, or difficult, coordination with local agencies (e.g. for EA policies) In general the Bank s TT has limited resources and capacity to supervise projects with multiple subprojects

30 Constraints and Challenges (Cont.) Experiences from Indonesia/Philippines: Limited distribution of picture books; Low awareness and attention to safeguard issues especially among local work units; Not enough training time for empowerment and technical facilitators on environmental and social safeguards; Village cadre does not receive training on environmental and social safeguards Exclusion of vulnerable groups

31 Tools from Across the Bank Social Funds: EA Sourcebook, Update # 24 EA for FIs: EA Sourcebook, Update # 27 Guidance for Social Funds in LAC CDD World Bank Website Toolkit for Africa ECA Safeguards Rehabilitation and Construction Checklist For Streamlined Environmental Management Plan AFR ESMF Guidelines (in preparation) 31

32 Good Practice from Across the Bank Indonesia Good Practice, Bad Practice Philippines Guidelines for Rural Infrastructure Ethiopia PSN Guidelines on Watershed Development and Project Audit Reports Ethiopia LIG Technical Planning Guidelines Madya Pradesh DPIP -Designing and Implementing a Good Framework and Measuring Safeguard Performance Uttaranchal RWSS Uptake of the Safeguard Provisions and Making the Borrower Accountable 32

33 Past Studies and Reports Environmental Management Mechanisms in CDD and other Decentralized Implementation Frameworks A Review of the India Portfolio. B. Rahill and S. Vaideeswaran, August 2003 Safeguards Thematic Review in Decentralized Projects: Philippines Kenneth M. Green, Jose Tiburcio Nicolas, Josefo Tuyor, Maya Gabriela Q. Villaluz L. Panner Selvam, Jitendra Shah, July 2004 The Effectiveness Of World Bank Support For Community-based And Driven Development OED-IEG July 2004 with background and independent Safeguard Policy Review focused on Bank s safeguard compliance by analyzing the appraisal, completion and supervision documents for 84 sample projects. Safeguards in CDD and Decentralized Projects-South Asia, Kenneth Green, October 2010 Assessing the Use of Environmental and Social Frameworks in Africa, Kenneth Green, Carolina Pizarro, Mustafa Pajazetovic, February 2011